[Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration

Andrew C Aitchison <andrew@aitchison.me.uk> Mon, 27 March 2023 17:10 UTC

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 18:10:38 +0100
From: Andrew C Aitchison <andrew@aitchison.me.uk>
To: mailsec@ietf.org
Message-ID: <82a08c5c-1125-311a-1324-7abca983d72a@aitchison.me.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mailsec/4F--qMdVBcnOMBGzNOrfuJMPfDo>
Subject: [Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration
Precedence: list

[ I am attempting to implement CLIENTID for Exim the MTA. ]

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3848
added ESMTPA, ESMTPS, ESMTPSA, LMTP, LMTPA, LMTPS and LMTPSA
to SMTP and ESMTP for use in the "with" clause of a Received
header in an Internet message.

Would we want CLIENTID to add to this list ?
My thought is that this would risk leaking information
which might allow a third party to infer facts about the
heuristics or rules used, so my guess is "no".

If we *did* decide to add to this list, would ESMTPSC and ESMTPSCA
be sufficient, or do we want LMTPSC and LMTPSCA too ?

Thanks,

-- 
Andrew C. Aitchison                      Kendal, UK
                    andrew@aitchison.me.uk

[Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmissio… Andrew C Aitchison
Re: [Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmi… Michael Peddemors
Re: [Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmi… Andrew C Aitchison
Re: [Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmi… Andrew C Aitchison
Re: [Mailsec] CLIENTID and ESMTP and LMTP Transmi… Michael Peddemors